1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | LPA did not find a copy of an eviction notice in R1’s file and when LPA asked for a copy of the eviction agreement, Staff #1 (S1) could not produce one. During interviews with Staff #1, they stated that R1’s stay was supposed to be temporary, that staff packed up R1’s belongings and a family member picked them up and took them to a hotel. S1 also admitted that facility did not issue an eviction notice. Staff #2 stated that they did not know the details of the eviction and directed LPA to speak with S1. During interviews with other parties, they stated that facility accepted R1on a temporary basis but R1 was willing to pay more money to stay longer. Other parties also stated that before R1 could pay to extend their stay, S1 had all their belongings packed up and waiting by the door for a family member to pack into the car. Other parties stated that R1 called the police, but they didn’t do anything. Other parties added that R1 was blind sided by the eviction, didn’t know what was going on and that R1 is now staying at an independent living facility.
Based on record review and interviews, there is enough evidence to verify the allegation. Therefore, the allegation is SUBSTANTIATED at this time.
Pursuant to Title 22 Division 6 Chapter 8 of the CA Code of Regulations, the following deficiencies were cited (refer to LIC 9099-D):
No health and safety hazards noted during the visit.
Exit interview conducted and a copy of the report was issued. |